Listeners’ perceptions of the personality of male alaryngeal speakers

References

• Blood G, Hyman M. Children's perception of nasal resonance. J Speech Hear Disord. 1977; 42: 446–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blood G, Blood I, Danhauer JL. Listeners’ impressions of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired children. J Commun Disord. 1978; 11: 513–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKinnon SL, Hess CW, Landry RG. Reactions of college students to speech disorders. J Commun Disord. 1986; 19: 75–82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silverman EM. Listeners’ impressions of speakers with lateral lisps. J Speech Hear Disord. 1976; 41: 547–52
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bennett S, Weinberg B. Acceptability ratings of normal, esophageal, and artificial larynx speech. J Speech Hear Res. 1973; 16: 608–15
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bridges A. Acceptability ratings and intelligibility scores of alaryngeal speakers by three listener groups. Br J Disord Commun. 1991; 26: 325–35
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Most T, Tobin Y, Mimran RC. Acoustic and perceptual characteristics of esophageal and tracheoesophageal speech production. J Commun Disord. 2000; 33: 165–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eadie TL, Doyle PC. Direct magnitude estimation and interval scaling of naturalness and severity in tracheoesophageal (TE) speakers. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2002; 45: 1088–96
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Doyle PC, Danhauer J, Reed C. Listeners’ perceptions of consonants produced by esophageal and tracheoesophageal talkers. J Speech Hear Disord. 1988; 53: 400–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Williams SE, Watson JB. Speaking proficiency variations according to method of alaryngeal voicing. Laryngoscope. 1987; 97: 737–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blood G, Mahan B, Hyman M. Judging personality and appearance from voice disorders. J Commun Disord. 1979; 12: 63–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lass NJ, Ruscello DM, Lakawicz JA. Listeners’ perceptions of nonspeech characteristics of normal and dysarthric children. J Commun Disord. 1988; 21: 385–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Susca M, Healey EC. Perceptions of simulated stuttering and fluency. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2001; 44: 61–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Searl JP, Carpenter MA. Acoustic cues to the voicing feature in tracheoesophageal speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2002; 45: 282–94
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbins J, Fisher HB, Blom EC, Singer MI. A comparative study of normal, esophageal, and tracheoesophageal speech production. J Speech Hear Disord. 1984; 49: 202–10
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gilmore SI. Social and vocational acceptability of esophageal speakers compared to normal speakers. J Speech Hear Res. 1974; 17: 599–607
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hartman D, Scott DA. Overt responses of listeners to alaryngeal speech. Laryngoscope. 1974; 84: 410–16
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Merwin GE, Goldstein L, Rothman HB. A comparison of speech using artificial larynx and tracheoesophageal puncture with valve in the same speaker. Laryngoscope. 1985; 95: 730–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pindzola R, Cain B. Acceptability ratings of tracheoesophageal speech. Laryngoscope 1988; 98: 394–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Evitts PM, Searl J. Reaction times of normal listeners to alaryngeal speech. J Speech Hear Res. In press.
   Google Scholar
• Casper JC, Colton RH. Clinical manual for laryngectomy and head/neck cancer rehabilitation. Singular Publishing, San Diego 1993
   Google Scholar
• Kent RD, Weismer G, Kent JF, Rosenbek JC. Toward phonetic intelligibility testing in dysarthria. J Speech Hear Disord. 1989; 54: 482–99
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hustad KC, Gearhart KJ. Listener attitudes toward individuals with cerebral palsy who use speech supplementation strategies. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2004; 13: 168–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panico J, Healey EC, Brouwer K, Susca M. Listener perceptions of stuttering across two presentation modes: A quantitative and qualitative approach. J Fluency Disord. 2005; 30: 65–85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sander EK. Comments on investigating listener reaction to speech disfluency. J Speech Hear Disord. 1965; 30: 159–65
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van As CJ, Koopmans-van Beinum FJ, Pols LC, Hilgers FJ. Perceptual evaluation of tracheoesophageal speech by naïve and experienced judges through the use of semantic differential scales. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2003; 46: 947–59
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eadie TL, Doyle PC. Direct magnitude estimation and interval scaling of naturalness and severity in tracheoesopahgeal (TE) speakers. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2002; 45: 1088–96
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Conover WJ. Practical nonparametric statistics3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York 1999
   Google Scholar
• Deshmane V, Parikh H, Pinni S, Parikh D, Rao R. Laryngectomy: A quality of life assessment. Indian J Cancer. 1995; 32: 121–30
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Relic A, Mazemda P, Arens C, Koller M, Glanz H. Investigating quality of life and coping resources after laryngectomy. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2001; 258: 514–17
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smith L, Calhoun KH. Intelligibility of tracheoesophageal speech among naïve listeners. South Med J. 1994; 87: 333–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Helfer KS. Auditory and auditory-visual perception of clear and conversational speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1997; 40: 432–43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sumby W, Pollach IJ. Visual contribution to speech intelligibility. J Acoust Soc Am. 1954; 26: 212–15
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia JM, Cannito MP. Influence of verbal and nonverbal contexts on the sentence intelligibility of a speaker with dysarthria. J Speech Hear Res. 1996; 39: 750–60
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Garcia JM, Daegenais PA. Dysarthric sentence intelligibility: Contribution of iconic gestures and message predictiveness. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998; 41: 1282–93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hustad KC, Cahill DR. Effects of presentation mode and repeated familiarization on intelligibility of dysarthric speech. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2003; 12: 198–208
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin R, Haroldson S. Stuttering and speech naturalness: Audio and audiovisual judgments. J Speech Hear Res. 1992; 35: 521–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Panico J, Healey E, Brouwer K, Susca M. Listener perceptions of stuttering across two presentation modes: A quantitative and qualitative approach. J Fluency Disord. 2005; 30: 65–85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Searl JP. Magnitude and variability of oral pressure in tracheoesophageal speech. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2002; 54: 312–28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerratt B, Kreiman J. Measuring voice quality with speech synthesis. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001; 110: 2560–66
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreiman J, Gerratt B. Sources of listener disagreement in voice quality assessment. J Acoust Soc Am. 2000; 108: 1867–76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreiman J, Gerratt B, Berke G. The multidimensional nature of pathologic voice quality. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994; 96: 1291–302
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar